Sefkow v. Sefkow

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a three-year average did not reflect obligor’s current income, which had been steadily increasing
• determining that the decision to average wages for an attorney whose business was substantially increasing each year was an inaccurate method of imputing support
• “[T]here is no evidence that [the obligor’s] 1981 or 1982 earnings reflect his income in 1984 and 1985.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).